[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151214083625.GA28073@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 09:36:25 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHV2 3/3] x86, ras: Add mcsafe_memcpy() function to recover
from machine checks
* Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> I still think it would be better if you get rid of BIT(63) and use a
> pair of landing pads, though. They could be as simple as:
>
> .Lpage_fault_goes_here:
> xorq %rax, %rax
> jmp .Lbad
>
> .Lmce_goes_here:
> /* set high bit of rax or whatever */
> /* fall through */
>
> .Lbad:
> /* deal with it */
>
> That way the magic is isolated to the function that needs the magic.
Seconded - this is the usual pattern we use in all assembly functions.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists